Homa Arjomand
416-737-9500
Feb
5,09
Speech delivered at panel discussion entitled:
“Islam is incompatible with Western Liberalism”, hosted by Oxford Union,
England, Feb 5th, 09.
I will start with practical aspect of Islam to prove Islam is
incompatible with the norm and values of the liberal democracy and leave
out the theory part. Since there are countless scholars sitting on benches of
universities, in on-going meetings, and conferences globally working on that
part. For this purpose I will focus on reactionary rules of Islam on
individuals, in particular children and women .I will then discuss the
limitation and restrains that this religion put on freethinkers and seekers of
freedom of expression to prove that liberation or moderation in Islam is
nothing but a utopia.
In Islam individuals have no rights or dignity, Islam identifies people and
individuals by their religion: Non-Muslim and Muslim. This is a concept that
cannot fit to any of modern definitions of citizenship. No civil society
can function based on such defining identity. Dividing the society based
on such clear-cut identity ultimately creates a society based on discrimination
or ghettos. The legal aspect of such a division is beyond comprehension.
Identifying groups of people or a country by their religion by default would
mean denial of individual’s right and dignity, to place collective “minority rights”
above individual rights”.
Women in Islam are degraded totally as individuals, and are treated as slaves.
Their position in society is worse than their position in family settings. They
are considered either as the daughter of a male, or a wife of a male. She would
need that male’s permission to travel, to work, to rent a place and study;
without that permission she is denied all her rights as a human being. She is
fully responsible to honour her family by keeping her virginity or else she
deserves death by honour killing. She must be submissive and allow the male of
the family, father, brother, uncle or grandfather, to find her a husband. In
some cases when they can not find a husband for the oldest daughter she will be
forced to accept a temporary marriage contract (Sigheh),
as short as one hour. Formation of a Haramsara:
keeping as many wives as possible in one place, or what is now known as
Polygamy which is marriage of one man with more than one woman. Child bride as young as 9 years to men as old
as her grandfather, are all proofs that Islam is incompatible with the
Western liberation.
Some might argue this is not Islam.
These are done by way of culture. This can be a moderate argument. But
my question is who is going to separate these? Where is the line? In
reality the ones who are strong believers of Islam practice this culture. Even
in heart of England under the name of freedom of religion, in so-called Muslim
communities women and girls are being physically abused, forced to marry,
deprived of their individual rights.
I wonder if the ones who believe Islam
is compatible with modern civilization can distinguish the difference between
civil and criminal matters when a so-called Islamic husband beats his wife or
daughter. Do you consider this act as a crime or a civil matter? How about
child-marriage? Do you consider it as a crime or religious obligation of a
religious father? How about forcing a child to have Hijab
and depriving girls of interacting freely with others and enjoying sports,
music and dance? Do you consider it as negligence and child abuse or is it a
family matter and freedom of practicing their minority rights, their religion?
In Islam, freethinking is a sin deserving of punishment. In reality, all
religions are such, but most religions have been restrained by freethinking and
freedom-loving humanity over hundreds of years. Islam was never restrained.
Islam as a political movement can work as a killing machine without any remorse
and this is what humanity has experienced throughout history and still suffers.
Islam as a religion cannot be compatible with modernism. Islam cannot tolerate
any criticism; and its critics will face death by Fatwa like Salman Rushdie, or will be assassinated in public so that
others will learn their lesson like Van Gogh. Announcing Holly War against
people who oppose Islamic views is another reason for Islam to stay
incompatible to western values and liberation. Physical punishment is
promoted throughout all its verses of Koran. It applies to everyone: to the
people who convert to other religions, to the ones who criticize Allah or
Mohammed, to disobedient women, to women who are involved in adultery. The list
goes on and on.
I question the ones who believe Islam is compatible to the Western
civilization. Please for a moment picture women, children, gays and lesbians
being hung on cranes for just practicing their private individual civil rights.
Would you still say Islam is compatible with Western values?
On the question of liberation or moderation of Islam, I must say in reality no
theology has ever been liberated. Theology is the antithesis of liberation,
regardless of whether it is Christianity, Buddhism or Islamic. It is like
saying librating slavery or librating fascism. Slavery needed to be demolished
so that universal rights of all individuals could be gained. The influential
leaders of the Abolition Movement of slavery never demanded reform in slavery,
never attempted to moderate slavery!
Instead they fought to demolish slavery totally and indeed that was the
only way to get liberated from slavery.
Centuries ago Christianity was defeated in a great confrontation as you all know;
Europe was the centre of the struggle against it. Intellectual giants stood up
to the powerful church, they criticized superstition scientifically and
philosophically and managed to educate all members of society. As the result
Christianity was pushed back to its right place but never liberated, in fact
Religion became private matter of individuals. Once religion was separated from
state, humanity slowly but surly became immune of religious aggression and its
dogmatism.
But Islam has never been challenged. There has not been a powerful political
and philosophical anti-Islamic movement that could be turned into a historical
achievement. Instead the Western governments lifted it during the cold war in
confrontation with the Soviet Union. Taliban were armed to their teeth and
unleashed to do all they can against this so-call enemy of humanity, so Islam
rose as a political movement and had ambition for political power. It recruited
its Man Power (army of God) through Islamization and
of course Koran has enough material to serve this purpose. All religious dogma,
and ceremonies, all forms of religious activities that were incompatible with
people’s civil rights and liberties once more under the flag of Sharia law were raised. It gave every right to its true
practitioners to impose the oppressive rules of Islam on people in a brutal
manner: be it throwing acid on unveiling women, or beheading sex workers after
raping them, to call for Fatwa against people who challenge Islamic views.
Execution, dismembering (chopping hands and taking eyes out), death by stoning,
bloodshed and even assault on children were ruled as a punishment of a crime in
relation to blasphemy and rubbery. With the rise of political Islam the general
outlook of society has shifted drastically not only in the regions run by
Islamic state but also on the global scale. Just because the leaders of this
political move want their share, they want recognition. They want more power not
only in Iran, Palestine and Afghanistan. They want their share in the heart of the
West too. Islamists would not hesitate to do anything in order to push back its
oppositions and gain recognition by the governments in the West. To them
recognition from the Western governments can be achieved through terrorizing
people by implanting bombs in the busiest streets, cinemas, subway stations,
hospitals and schools and also by creating a parallel power structure “Sharia Court” within the surrounding societies. No doubt
humanity suffered a great deal and will feel the pain for many years to come
but one can not say what is happening today is a ‘Clash of Civilization’.
The courses of political events in various countries during and after the
Cold War from Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Rwanda, Somalia and the Soviet states
can only be evaluated as a power struggle between two forces. One being the
force for secularism, and the other the force of political Islam, not the clash
of civilization as Huntington suggests.
In
regards to the question about the battle against Islam and religion, that is
being raised, in Iran and its comparison with the European struggle against
religion…
I must emphasize, what has happened in Iran under the Sharia law, from enforcing sexual apartheid to mass
execution, has built a constant confrontation between Islam and people. What we
are witnessing in Iran today is a growing movement against Islam, in particular
political Islam. People witness the direct implementation of Islam on their
lives. People are well aware that what really happened in Iran,
Afghanistan, Algeria, and Nigeria was the rule of true Islam. People in Iran do
not believe in moderating Islam. They are uprising against the roles of
Allah. In various cities and provinces of Iran, veils which are the
symbol and flag of Islam and its holly books, were put to fire. People have
been resisting the compulsory Hijab and some faced
harsh punishments as the result, 100 slashes in public and long term
imprisonment, some lost their lives. All these daily struggles of enlightenment
against Islam show the significant struggle for De-Islamisation. I strongly
believe people in Iran soon will liberate themselves from Islam. And of course
some are rushing to save Islam from falling, the notion of moderating or
Librating Islam rose when people put the veils on fire, when people were
resisting God’s rules and regulation.
Khatemi and Refsanjani are both well known as
leaders of political Islam, both became presidents of the Islamic state in Iran.
During their presidency they became the cause of all inhuman attacks against
humanity. When they saw veils on fire at demonstrations and riots, they
too rushed to save Islam, and over one night they became reformists and
defenders of the moderation of Islam.
The advocator of these notions claim: what takes place under the
name of Islam has nothing to do with Islam but is the result of
mis-interpretations of the Koran. I believe the Advocators of Moderating Islam
are trying to pave the way for oppressive and historically backward slavery
culture, to continue its existence. People are well aware that Islam has no
place in modern society. The ones who insist that Islam can be modernized are
the ones who want to maintain their religion and its survival. Slavery could
never become modernized. One can argue that if Islam allows a woman to go to
school with a knee-length skirt or to become a judge or a member of parliament
as long as she does not speak of her sexuality then Islam is modern. This, of
course is their view of liberation, which is a century away of what I call
liberation. To make my point clear Islam or any other religion cannot be forced
upon people. The society, just like any other form of life is ever evolving and
changing in order to survive. Any ideology that is put forth to restrict that
evolution cannot work as it goes against the very nature of existence.
In response of the question of ‘would Islamic teaching and Sharia
law be tolerated in a liberal society?’
I would like to draw your attention to the recent victory in Canada
against Sharia Court and faith based arbitration. The
movement of secularism under the banner of “One Law for All”, rose in
confrontation against Sharia Court and managed to
gain separation of religion from the justice system, no more faith based
arbitration. I am certain Sharia law or any religious
laws and regulations will not be tolerated any more, not in our modern society.
The movement of secularism has over 100 years of history. This is a movement
for separation of religion from state. This movement is for the universal
rights of women and children. It is for “One Law for all” and that is
progressive and modern law. It is for
one system of education, one system of court. This movement aims to bring about
the civil rights and equality of all. The fact that people demonstrated before the
Canadian embassies in England, France, Germany, Netherlands, Holland and Sweden,
and chanted “no to Sharia Court ,
no to faith based arbitration”, proves that Sharia
law and regulation will not be tolerated. This Victory in Canada can only be
described as a conscious voice of people who do not want the interference of
religion in state, simply because they are well aware of religious aggression,
people would not allow history to repeat itself. No, they are not going back to
the medieval age.